Skip to main content
Fig. 2 | BMC Biology

Fig. 2

From: Additive contributions of melanopsin and both cone types provide broadband sensitivity to mouse pupil control

Fig. 2

Opponent cone input is common among melanopsin-responsive pretectal neurons. a Spectral power distribution of daylight (7–8° solar elevation on clear days, from [27]) and effective photon flux for wildtype mouse opsins. b Spectra for the background stimulus used to generate cone-isolating stimuli, corresponding effective photon flux for Opn1mwR mouse opsins and maximal contrasts for each produced by cone-isolating stimuli (see methods for additional details). c Left: Example responses of MR units to 75% contrast cone-isolating stimuli (30 trials) illustrating non-opponent (top), S-ON/L-OFF (middle) and L-ON/S-OFF (bottom) behaviour. Right: opsin preference plots showing normalised response across each stimulus-space dimension (grey lines; see ‘Methods’) and resulting mean vector, with vertical and horizontal axes corresponding to pure L- and S-opsin-driven responses and diagonals reflecting equally weighted opponent or non-opponent contributions (as indicated by key in left part of g). d Mean ± SEM baseline subtracted, normalised, responses of MR units to cone-isolating stimuli (Top: non-opponent, n = 26; Middle: S-ON/L-OFF, n = 17; Bottom: L-ON/S-OFF, n = 7). e, f Mean ± SEM contrast response relationships (percentage variance in firing accounted for by the stimulus) of opponent (e; n = 24) or non-opponent (f, n = 26) MR cells for single opsin stimuli (left; classified according to response sign in e and strength in f) or for stimuli modulating both cone opsins in unison or antiphase (right). Data were analysed by two-way RM ANOVA with Sidak’s post-test; *, ** and *** represent P < 0.05, P < 0.01 and P < 0.001. g Proportions of MR and non-MR units exhibiting each response type and opsin preferences for all units of each class. Response type distributions compared by Fisher’s exact text. See also Additional file 3: Figure S3 for further data on non-MR cell responses

Back to article page